Yes, it sounds a bit foolish and academic, but it's not either. Years ago it was called "common sense". The founders of our government designed a truly new and interesting way for government to function and at the same time protect individual citizens. Despite their outstanding successes over the last 200 years - in the long run they in failed to protect individual citizens from each other. We've reached a fork in the road and must either fix our government or try something else.
Americans are confused. The founders constructed a government that was empowered by the people, each of three branches overlooked each other, and individual initiative was promoted and protected. Much of the original intent is behind us now. Today, the citizens are drawn in two directions.
- (1) Some wish to fix the founders vision of freedom. They like the idea of as small a government as necessary to govern, reward for individual initiative and achievement, and free market capitalism.
- (2) Some believe in unlimited government control, limited freedom, government monetary control, and equal wages for unequal work.
For me there is no contest. Of the two choices:
- (1) is overwhelmingly attractive.
- My "puzzle" is that I find absolutely no logical support for (2).